Alex White (Labour)

I also support Senator Regan's amendment. In particular, I echo what Senator Bacik said about the detail and care that has gone into drafting this amendment. It cannot be said that Opposition parties have not taken care with the details of the alternatives to imprisonment for non-payment of debts that are being brought forward. Rather than simple debating points, great clarity, care and substance have gone into this proposal and others that have emanated from this side of the House. Although I am waiting to hear it, I cannot see what objection can be made to this amendment. Even speakers on the Government side have acknowledged the necessity and importance of alternatives to imprisonment being in place for non-payment of debts.

I wish to clarify that I was not disagreeing earlier with Senator O'Donovan's support for the exercise of compassion by District Court judges. However, it is no longer enough for us to rely on that as a means of resolving such complex, delicate and difficult issues. It should not be left to District Court judges to determine whether a matter should be put back for another two or three weeks, adjourned to the autumn or assessed by a judge as to whether somebody will pay up at some point. It should not be left to him or her to make that determination.

It has been said so many times by the Supreme Court and the High Court that the Oireachtas is here to legislate. It is for the Oireachtas to bring forward proposals on how these matters should be dealt with. They ought not be left to the discretion, or compassion where it exists, of the District Court. They should be clarified in law by the Oireachtas. For those reasons I strongly support Senator Regan's amendment. It is a practical and clear proposal which would form the basis for an alternative to imprisonment in many cases. We are familiar with attachment of earnings orders in other areas. We know that attachment orders can be made in family law proceedings. We are familiar with how they can be introduced and what role they can play from many comparable cases.

I await with some interest the basis on which the Minister of State will be rejecting this amendment, as that is what I anticipate he will do. It is a pity, because care and attention has clearly gone into this aspect of the matter. It should not be rejected in the manner in which I anticipate it will, although I may be proven wrong. I support the amendment and endorse what has been said by my colleagues about it.